Research into hallucinogenic drugs begins to shake off decades of taboo

http://www.economist.com/node/18864332?story_id=18864332&fsrc=rss

by bchjam • 15 years ago

115 67 15 years ago

It's amazing. The more and more research we do, the more we find out that the FUD surrounding lots of drugs is nothing more than that... FUD.

sliverstorm2• 15 years ago

I haven't seen anyone asserting the abuse potential has vanished (or never existed). They are simply acknowledging there are legitimate uses.

drivebyacct22• 15 years ago

You must have missed the last several drug related posts here on HN. Full of research on that very topic. And yes, the abuse potential is much lower than the government would have you believe.

Alex39176• 15 years ago

"Psilocybin has shown promise in [...] relieving cluster headaches (a common form of chronic headache) and in alleviating the anxiety experienced by terminally ill cancer patients."

Cluster headaches are absolutely not a common form of chronic headache. They are fairly rare, affecting .1% of the population, and are extremely debilitating; many sufferers commit suicide rather than suffer through the pain.

Here is an amazing talk by Bob Wold, the guy who founded Cluster Busters, the non-profit organization that's partnering with Harvard to do the research on psilocybin as a treatment:

http://vimeo.com/10918637

"and in alleviating the anxiety experienced by terminally ill cancer patients."

Here is the talk by one of the researchers who was testing psilocybin for treating anxiety due to terminal cancer:

http://vimeo.com/10931182

Both are among my all time favorite talks, both are extremely powerful and moving. I submitted them to TED as potential talks last year, but apparently no luck so far.

profquail• 15 years ago

I think you misinterpreted the sentence you quoted -- cluster headaches can be a common form of chronic headache, whilst being rare in the general population. That is, people suffering from chronic headaches are rare in the general population but those who are, are likely suffering from cluster headaches.

pygy_• 15 years ago

Some facts about headaches:

Migraine has a prevalence between 10 and 20%.

The chronology of migraine and cluster headache differs, but they are both chronic issues.

Untreated migraine attacks last several hours and recur ususally at least once per month. ~10% of Migraine sufferer end up abusing pain killers, which increases the attack frequency and leaves them with a permanent, milder background headache.

Cluster attacks last between 15 and 180 minutes (usually less than 1 hour) and recur several times per day during several weeks, then remit, only to replase later on (often at the same period of the week). Hence the name "cluster".

Around 1/1000 cluster patients have "untractable chronic cluster headache", ie daily attacks without interruptions, that resist to medical treatment. (I don't remember the prevalence of drug-sensitive chronic CH).

hsmyers• 15 years ago

I have never understood the mechanics of 'drug is bad if use equal entertainment'. It will be interesting to see if the release of this information and the refereed to thaw in the taboo will lead anywhere...

Alex39176• 15 years ago

"It will be interesting to see if the release of this information and the refereed to thaw in the taboo will lead anywhere..."

This document shows the projected timeline for legalizing MDMA for medical purposes: http://maps.org/prospectus.pdf

Essentially the MDMA phase 2 trials are going to continue for another 2 - 3 years, at which point there will be an end-of-phase-2 meeting with the FDA, where they will come up with a plan for phase 3 studies. Phase 3 will take another 3 - 5 years, and that's assuming they're able to raise all the money it's going to take. However, it's looking like there is a good chance of getting MDMA legalized within ten years for medical use if MAPS can raise the money.

Psilocybin is also close to getting moved to schedule 2 or even schedule 3. However, AFAIK the research that's being done isn't formally designed to turn psilocybin into a prescription drug, so I'm not entirely sure how the current research gets used going forward.

Most research into the medical benefits of marijuana has been stalled because of Obama. Essentially the person Obama appointed has decided to block MAPS from getting any marijuana to use for studies that might show potential benefits from marijuana, so even though the FDA keeps approving their studies they can't actually go forward with any of them.

sp3325• 15 years ago

Aren't most recreational drugs addictive and destructive? It's not too hard to understand why there's a stigma.

Alex39176• 15 years ago

"There are no good or bad drugs. Drugs are what we make of them. They have good and bad uses."

http://www.matrixmasters.net/salon/?p=129

maaku• 15 years ago

Primarily just those which result in dopamine production are addictive. Psychedelic drugs do not, and are generally not addictive.

sp3325• 15 years ago

Wow, that's a lot of downvotes and only one counter-point. What sorts of recreational drugs are not addictive? And what sorts of drugs will not mess you up when taken in "recreational" dosages?

gnosis4• 15 years ago

Food can be addictive and destructive. Sex can be addictive and destructive. Money and power can be addictive and destructive.

"Recreational drugs" can be used in respectful ways. To many they are holy and sacred.

They can enhance your creativity, open your eyes to the wonder of the universe around you, and gift you with empathy for all living creatures.

With them you can experience death and rebirth and profoundly transform the way you understand and relate to the world. They can be intensely therapeutic.

There is certainly a stigma against all that, and against certain drugs and experiences which buck against the need for many people to reduce life to a little tiny and orderly box under their command where they can channel your world view and your understanding of yourself and others in a manner of their liking.

Yet despite all of their efforts they can not fully resist the deep need of humanity to transcend their ordinary state of consciousness. Each society has sanctioned ways of doing this, whether it's through certain approved substances (like alcohol), rituals, or ordeals.

Curiously, societies tend to differ as to which mind altering substances are prohibited and which are allowed. Usually it's the substances with a long tradition of use in the given society that are allowed, and the newer substances which are prohibited. The very same substances which are allowed and even praised in one society might be despised and prohibited in others (alcohol, mushrooms, and marijuana are some great examples).

Mind altering substances which a particular society is encountering for the first time and the use of which can not be easily fit in to the dominant culture's traditions are usually seen as a threat.

But this can change over time as the members of that society get more familiar with the substances and learn to use them in socially sanctioned ways.

baconface2• 15 years ago

Regardless of how effective drugs like LSD and psilocybin are, they make it difficult to maintain traditional societal hierarchies of power and control and thus will be stamped out.

derleth5• 15 years ago

> they make it difficult to maintain traditional societal hierarchies of power

How? How does making you see things that aren't real challenge any hierarchies?

Alex39176• 15 years ago

"How does making you see things that aren't real challenge any hierarchies?"

While LSD and psilocybin do sometimes cause people to hallucinate, this is only one small part of the psychedelic experience. The real value is in how the drugs change your thinking. It would take an entire book to explain this, but here are a few YouTube videos to give you the basic idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c8an2XZ3MU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLXmE_hxCcg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeqmKwsvM58

It's difficult to explain how exactly they challenge hierarchies, but the 35,000 foot overview would be that psychedelics tend to make one more prosocial, whereas hierarchies tend to be fueled by antisocial behaviors. They also tend to give one self-confidence and internalize one's locus of control, whereas again hierarchies can only exist when people lack self-confidence and have relatively external locii of control. Essentially hierarchies are built on the backs of those trying to fill some sort of void in their lives, whereas psychedelics undermine this by giving one perspective and making one whole.

Here is the best description I've found:

"What is the psychedelic experience? For me it's the full and overwhelming realization of all the beauty, love, and pain, the wonder and possibility, of the human experience. For the first time you see your life truly objectively, what's going wrong, and what's going right. You grasp and grapple with how you can do better, and you are overcome by the newfound desire to strengthen your community, your relationships, and your karma. And so it proceeds for the next 4 to 6 hours.

And as the raw intensity of the experience fades, it leaves behind this lasting sense of optimism, hope, and strength, a sense that something essential has been renewed, replenished, and maybe even reborn. Above all you're left with a need to make things better, to help others, and to improve your life. And at last you have the strength and vigor you need, without which action was not possible.

The morning after taking LSD it's not uncommon for people to re-enroll in school, restart their job search, or reunite with old friends. There is this sense that whatever was holding us back is dead, we've come to terms with it, and now the power is back in our hands.

It's an experience that will shake your faith in society while simultaneously restoring your faith in yourself, the meaningfulness of existence, and your ability to make a difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6Ps_MBXEdA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2hL6iCSFxk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY59wZdCDo0 "

anonLSD4• 15 years ago

"see things that aren't real" is a very poor characterization of the psychedelic experience. One attempt at describing a small part of its many aspects: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2498783

mahyarm• 15 years ago

How does hallucinating do that, other than people going insane like they are on PCP?

anonLSD4• 15 years ago

"Hallucinating" is really a misnomer when discussing LSD and shrooms. "Profound changes in perception and cognition" would be more like it.

omarchowdhury2• 15 years ago

I think what OP is saying is that if every single person in a given society was to take psilocybin/LSD (or psychedelics in general) then that society would not look like society as it does 'traditionally'. The other posters to this comment thread ask how "hallucinating" would do this, but they need to realize that it is not visions or hallucinations that is the variable of change during episodes of influence under these drugs, but it is the change in thinking that incorporates the qualities of goodness, unity, beauty, hope, acceptance (I think all of these words can be compressed into the word 'love') that would be detrimental to the status quo if everyone were to feel this way.

baconface2• 15 years ago

Thanks.

derleth5• 15 years ago

Where is your evidence for any of that?

stef25• 15 years ago

Not necessarily. I get how it makes you question authority and generally see life in a different light, but it doesn't exactly do so in a way that it would lead to society breaking down. The long term effects are manifested more internally than externally IMHO.

r22• 15 years ago

DMT, which is a natural substance similar to serotonin (and also in the human body), is one of the most profound spiritual experiences one can have. It is not like any other drug. It is like opening a door to another dimension. Here's a great documentary on it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc9e7PXsXDE

bermanoid• 15 years ago

DMT, which is a natural substance similar to serotonin (and also in the human body)

What does the similarity to serotonin have to say in favor of the drug?

If you want to boost your serotonin levels, it's trivial to do so directly by taking 5-HTP, St. John's Wort, or tryptophan supplements, all of which you can get at your local pharmacy without a prescription.

And be cautious: excess serotonin in the human body is thought to be bad for heart health, which is why supplements like 5-HTP are sometimes prescribed with Carbidopa to slow the 5-HTP -> serotonin transition outside of the brain (Carbidopa doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier, so 5-HTP -> serotonin is unchecked within the brain, whereas it's slowed outside of it), so not as much serotonin ends up in your bloodstream. I have no idea if DMT has similar heart-unfriendly properties to serotonin, but the point is, saying that it's similar chemically and that the substance exists in our body doesn't necessarily mean it's a great thing to take. Our bodies are careful balances of thousands of different chemicals, and some of them are only there in trace amounts, it can absolutely be dangerous to throw the balance out of whack (though if I had to guess, in DMT's case a couple doses is probably not such a problem).

I'm not necessarily knocking recreational drugs: I've dabbled and enjoyed, but chemical similarity is not a good enough reason to assume that something is either safe, effective, or in any way good for you - there are many compounds that are extremely close to things that we find in our bodies that are very dangerous.

...which is exactly why we need more legitimate studies on these things, IMO. I'm glad that the tide is starting to shift on this, we should know a lot more about the potential benefits and risks of all the substances that people ingest, whether they typically ingest them for fun, or for health.

resdirector• 15 years ago

A little off-topic but...

This is a very good 60s psychedelic radio station: http://www.techwebsound.com/. Apart from playing very good 60s music, it has a plays (somewhat ironically) a lot of archive recordings of government warnings against LSD, mushrooms and other psychedelic drugs.

Interesting to listen to the formings of society's current attitudes towards drugs.

daimyoyo• 15 years ago

Steve Jobs has said in interviews that his taking LSD as a youth was a life changing experience for him. I am very much in favor of restarting clinical trials as long as it's not abused. I think there might be great potential there and as long as we continue to stigmatize it, we will miss out on any knowledge we could gain from studying it. And even if it turns out to have no medicinal value at all, at least we'd know, rather than treating psychoactive drugs like poison. I mean, we have drugs now for treating fatigue in people who work long and irregular hours, why can't we at least give these compounds a real shot at proving whether or not they have value?

JonnieCache3• 15 years ago

Rick Doblin, the director of the multidisciplinary Association or Psychedelic Studies did a talk at google, which you can watch here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwAGkGpv6Ss

Mainstreaming Psychedelics: From FDA to Harvard to Burning Man

politician• 15 years ago

I wonder if zombie movies aren't rooted in a parody of governmental fears about widespread drug use.

yid• 15 years ago

Perhaps put the bong down now? :)

rdl• 15 years ago

MAPS (maps.org, the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies) is one of the best run nonprofits out there (I have donated for years). They have very low overhead, and in addition to directly funding key research (which is expensive) have gotten funding from other sources to cover important research into the use of MDMA and hallucinogens to treat diseases and disorders such as PTSD.

quinndupont• 15 years ago

Is there a genuine resurgence of interest in psychedelics in the geek community, or is it just me? There seems to be a new article posted on HN on psychedelics every few weeks. Could this be the dawn of a new 1960s?

Alex39176• 15 years ago

"Could this be the dawn of a new 1960s?"

No. In the 1960s psychedelics were part of the counterculture, whereas today the research and interest is all (purposely) revolving around their potential as tools for the mainstream. In fact that's probably the biggest thing we learned from the 60s, is that if we want these substances to be accepted then we need to integrate them with our existing culture, institutions, and values. If you go to any of the conferences on the academic research into psychedelics then one of the first things you'll pick up on is how much most of them hate Timothy Leary, or at the very least his legacy.

Research into hallucinogenic drugs begins to shake off decades of taboo

Related Stories